![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
"Mihai Preda"
Apr 2015
3·11·41 Posts |
![]()
Consider the number PowerSmooth(1000000) with the 2 factors removed; e.g. in pari-gp:
Code:
PowerSmooth(B1)= result=1; forprime(p=3, B1, result *= p^floor(log(B1)/log(p))); return(result) PowerSmooth(1000000) The puzzle is: find a multiple of this number that has a Hamming Weight <= 710000. (or, How low a HW multiple can you find?) Thanks! :) Last fiddled with by preda on 2020-08-03 at 10:26 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Jun 2003
22·52·72 Posts |
![]()
Iterating thru all odd numbers, starting from 3,
Code:
3:720673 9:720566 21:720169 59:720143 89:719926 127:719857 237:719477 261:719250 817:719025 6923:718588 229095:718410 276755:718351 322621:718138 Code:
10:720468 12:719859 242:719603 607:719455 1945:719364 1954:718901 5343:718576 Using random odd numbers < 2^64 Code:
10719928016004921607:720163 9421399378650073937:719987 9838800997419312683:719646 9031419907504264227:719565 12801182192819992405:719465 11276055256514179587:719415 7687617259492261083:719397 3594335502178041641:719255 6046992651811463807:718858 12624414163832553385:718786 4750919058227643243:718688 18130704136173611049:718654 5224850625010740453:718528 1147537420811012579:718472 7233411429689023907:718469 1993933662070155813:718441 6862363197769235605:718113 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
"Mihai Preda"
Apr 2015
25118 Posts |
![]()
I broke through 718K:
multiplying with 1999099*3684553 produces HW=717965 still a long way to go to 710K.. it looks like the "brute force search" is not working very well. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE
467 Posts |
![]()
Hitting < 718K should have a probability around 1 in 2e7, so still achievable by brute force, hitting < 710K is much less likely with 1 in 8e76. Formula used (please correct me if my approach is not applicable):
\[p = \frac{\sum_{k=0}^{x}{\binom{\lceil log2(n) \rceil}{k}}}{n}\]
Since we are multiplying \(n\) with another value to "depopulize" it, the final result number is getting larger. This is not displayed by this formula, but should not make a huge difference, since our value for multiplication is really small in comparison. Last fiddled with by kruoli on 2020-08-04 at 14:14 Reason: Minor clarifications. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Bamboozled!
"πΊππ·π·π"
May 2003
Down not across
22·2,659 Posts |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE
467 Posts |
![]()
Do you mean my third bullet point? In that case the sum really should still go from \(x\) to \(\lceil log2(n) \rceil\). But maybe I'm missing something here.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Bamboozled!
"πΊππ·π·π"
May 2003
Down not across
22·2,659 Posts |
![]()
Another possibly interesting question: the quantity hammingweight(PowerSmooth(N))/N appears to converge to a value close to 0.72 ---can one prove that it converges and can one find a relatively simple expression for its value?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Jan 2017
23·11 Posts |
![]() Quote:
So the 0.72 value is probably 1/log(2)/2, where the 1/log(2) comes from the size of the product as predicted by the prime number theorem, and an additional /2 for only half the bits being ones. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Jun 2003
62B16 Posts |
![]()
This should follow a binomial distribution-I suspect. Though no proof as bits are not independent.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Jun 2003
22·52·72 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Jun 2003
22·52·72 Posts |
![]() Code:
136110417:717547 173564051:717463 Last fiddled with by axn on 2020-08-05 at 10:38 Reason: Another improvement |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Some puzzle | Harrywill | Puzzles | 4 | 2017-05-03 05:10 |
Four 1's puzzle | Uncwilly | Puzzles | 75 | 2012-06-12 13:42 |
a puzzle | bcp19 | Puzzles | 18 | 2012-03-02 04:11 |
Dot puzzle | nibble4bits | Puzzles | 37 | 2006-02-27 09:35 |
now HERE'S a puzzle. | Orgasmic Troll | Puzzles | 6 | 2005-12-08 07:19 |